Think Globally, Act Locally," the bumper stickers say,
and, this fall, the Army is taking the advice to heart. It
is thinking about its obligations in Iraq and Afghanistan
and considering whether to quicken the pace at which it
calls up servicepersons from such localities as Newport,
Corvallis and Forest Grove.

This is a global issue with a powerful local impact. As of
last Friday, five families in Oregon and Southwest
Washington have lost husbands, fathers and sons this month
alone, reflecting the sharp rise in attacks in Iraq.

Other powerful effects of military call-ups on our
communities include the less-visible physical, emotional,
financial, professional and psychological tolls of wartime
deployments. They are showing up in increasing numbers in
counseling offices, medical clinics and divorce courts all
over the region.

The fact is, even uninjured soldiers who come home, come
home changed by war. Their families change, too. But beyond
these people and the narrow slice of the population that
works on veterans' issues, Oregon hasn't begun to
recognize the broader implications of serving as a gateway
to military service in the Middle East.

That's why, when the Army says it is interested in
rotating Guardsmen and Reservists to Iraq more rapidly than
ever, people at home should care.

The Oregon Army National Guard has sent 4,300 soldiers --
more than two-thirds of its total number -- to service since
9/11. Most went to Iraq or Afghanistan. Under Pentagon
policy, National Guard soldiers aren't required to
serve more than 24 months in any 60-month period, although
some volunteer to do so. If the administration changes that
policy and requires more citizen-soldiers to leave their
homes for longer periods of time, it's going to hurt.
The people among us who already have sacrificed the most
will be required to do even more.

Gov. Kulongoski opposes this pressure to extend or repeat
deployments. And he has expressed concern that the heavy
burden of overseas deployments will leave Oregon
underprotected in case of local emergencies.

Further, this discussion sends another signal that the Army
is too thinly stretched overseas. A year ago, Army National
Guard soldiers and Reservists made up about 43 percent of
the total force in Iraq. The Army acknowledged that it had
asked a great deal of its reserve component and so began
shifting more of the burden to full-time, active-duty
soldiers. The Pentagon told The Wall Street Journal last
week that National Guard soldiers and reservists now make up
about 12 percent of the force in Iraq.

Apparently, that shift placed too heavy a burden on the
Army's active-duty component, so it needs to turn again
to the National Guard. While this isn't a discussion
the administration wants to have in the last weeks before
midterm elections, it's an important one for
Oregonians. They're the ones who will have to live with
the consequences of sending their fellow citizens to war
more frequently and leaving them there longer.